Purpose This is the first randomized phase II/III trial comparing two carboplatin-based chemotherapy regimens in patients with urothelial cancer who are ineligible (“unfit”) for cisplatin chemotherapy. Patients and Methods The primary objective of the phase III part of this study was to compare the overall survival (OS) of chemotherapy-naive patients with measurable disease and an impaired renal function (glomerular filtration rate < 60 but > 30 mL/min) and/or performance score of 2 who were randomly assigned to receive either gemcitabine/carboplatin (GC) or methotrexate/carboplatin/vinblastine (M-CAVI). To detect an increase of 50% in median survival with GC compared with M-CAVI (13.5 v 9 months) based on a two-sided log-rank test at error rates α = .05 and β = .20, 225 patients were required. Secondary end points were overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), toxicity, and quality of life. Results In all, 238 patients were randomly assigned by 29 institutions over a period of 7 years. The median follow-up was 4.5 years. Best ORRs were 41.2% (36.1% confirmed response) for patients receiving GC versus 30.3% (21.0% confirmed response) for patients receiving M-CAVI (P = .08). Median OS was 9.3 months in the GC arm and 8.1 months in the M-CAVI arm (P = .64). There was no difference in PFS (P = .78) between the two arms. Severe acute toxicity (death, grade 4 thrombocytopenia with bleeding, grade 3 or 4 renal toxicity, neutropenic fever, or mucositis) was observed in 9.3% of patients receiving GC and 21.2% of patients receiving M-CAVI. Conclusion There were no significant differences in efficacy between the two treatment groups. The incidence of severe acute toxicities was higher for those receiving M-CAVI.
The prognosis for these patients is poor. This, in part, reflects late diagnosis and poor performance status at the time of presentation. The role of salvage treatments and high-dose chemotherapy at relapse is not clear. However, it is encouraging that there are five long-term survivors in our patient population.
Germ cell tumour is the most frequent malignant tumour type in young men with a 100% rise in the incidence every 20 years. Despite this, the high sensitivity of germ cell tumours to platinum-based chemotherapy, together with radiation and surgical measures, leads to the high cure rate of > or = 99% in early stages and 90%, 75-80% and 50% in advanced disease with 'good', 'intermediate' and 'poor' prognostic criteria (IGCCCG classification), respectively. The high cure rate in patients with limited metastatic disease allows the reduction of overall treatment load, and therefore less acute and long-term toxicity, e.g. organ sparing surgery for specific cases, reduced dose and treatment volume of irradiation or substitution of node dissection by surveillance or adjuvant chemotherapy according to the presence or absence of vascular invasion. Thus, different treatment options according to prognostic factors including histology, stage and patient factors and possibilities of the treating centre as well may be used to define the treatment strategy which is definitively chosen for an individual patient. However, this strategy of reduction of treatment load as well as the treatment itself require very high expertise of the treating physician with careful management and follow-up and thorough cooperation by the patient as well to maintain the high rate for cure. Treatment decisions must be based on the available evidence which has been the basis for this consensus guideline delivering a clear proposal for diagnostic and treatment measures in each stage of gonadal and extragonadal germ cell tumour and individual clinical situations. Since this guideline is based on the highest evidence level available today, a deviation from these proposals should be a rare and justified exception.
PurposeThe combination of gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GC) is a standard regimen in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer. A phase I/II study suggested that a three-drug regimen that included paclitaxel had greater antitumor activity and might improve survival.Patients and MethodsWe conducted a randomized phase III study to compare paclitaxel/cisplatin/gemcitabine (PCG) with GC in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate, and toxicity.ResultsFrom 2001 to 2004, 626 patients were randomly assigned; 312 patients were assigned to PCG, and 314 patients were assigned to GC. After a median follow-up of 4.6 years, the median OS was 15.8 months on PCG versus 12.7 months on GC (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; P = .075). OS in the subgroup of all eligible patients was significantly longer on PCG (3.2 months; HR, 0.82; P = .03), as was the case in patients with bladder primary tumors. PFS was not significantly longer on PCG (HR, 0.87; P = .11). Overall response rate was 55.5% on PCG and 43.6% on GC (P = .0031). Both treatments were well tolerated, with more thrombocytopenia and bleeding on GC than PCG (11.4% v 6.8%, respectively; P = .05) and more febrile neutropenia on PCG than GC (13.2% v 4.3%, respectively; P < .001).ConclusionThe addition of paclitaxel to GC provides a higher response rate and a 3.1-month survival benefit that did not reach statistical significance. Novel approaches will be required to obtain major improvements in survival of incurable urothelial cancer.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.